Generic approach to generating permutations for all-to-all personalized exchange for self-routing multistage interconnection networks

ABSTRACT

Disclosed is a method for all-to-all personalized exchange for a class of multistage interconnecting networks (MINs). The method is based on a Latin square matrix corresponding to a set of admissible permutations of a multistage interconnecting network. Disclosed are first and second methods for constructing a Latin square matrix used in the personalized exchange technique. Also disclosed is a generic method for decomposing all-to-all personalized exchange patterns into admissible permutations to form the Latin square matrix for self-routing networks which are a subclass of the MINs.

STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

This invention was made with Government support under Grant No. DAAH 04-96-1-0234, awarded by th U.S. Army Research Office, and Grant No. OSR-935-0540, awarded by the National Science Foundation. The Government has certain rights in this invention.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

This application generally relates to networks, and more specifically to communications in a network.

Collective communication generally involves global data movement and global control among a group of nodes in a network. Many scientific applications exhibit the need of such collective communication patterns. For example, efficient support for collective communication may significantly reduce communication latency and simplify the programming of parallel computers. Collective communication has received much attention in telecommunication and parallel processing in recent years.

All-to-all communication is one type of collective communication. In all-to-all communication, every node in a group sends a message to each other node in the group. Depending on the nature of the message to be sent, all-to-all communication can be further classified as all-to-all broadcast and all-to-all personalized exchange. In all-to-all broadcast, every node sends the same message to all other nodes. In all-to all personalized exchange, every node sends a distinct message to every other node. All-to-all broadcast and all-to-all personalized exchange may be used in networking and parallel computational applications. For example, all-to-all broadcasting may be used in performing matrix multiplication, LU-factorization, and Householder transformations. All-to-all personalized exchange may be used, for example, in performing matrix transposition and fast Fourier transforms (FFTs).

Techniques for all-to-all personalized exchange have been considered in different types of networks. A first class of techniques is used in a high-dimensional network type, such as the hypercube. One drawback of using the first class of techniques in a high-dimensional network type is the poor scalability due to the unbounded node degrees of the high-dimensional network topology.

A second class of techniques have been developed for use in mesh and torus networks. These techniques have an advantage over the first techniques in that these network types have bounded node degrees and are more scalable. However, these second techniques used in the mesh and torus networks have a drawback in that long communications delays may be experienced in all-to-all personalized exchange due to the network topology.

Thus, there is required a technique for performing all-to-all personalized exchanges which is scalable while simultaneously seeking to minimize communication delays.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The above-mentioned and other features of the invention will now become apparent by reference to the following description taken in connection with the accompanying drawings in which:

FIG. 1 is an embodiment of a computer system according to the present invention;

FIGS. 2A-2C are block diagrams of example types of multistage interconnection networks;

FIG. 3 is a block diagram of an embodiment of an 8×8 baseline network;

FIGS. 4A and 4B are flowcharts depicting method steps of an embodiment of performing an all-to-all personalized exchange method in a multistage interconnection network;

FIG. 5 is an example of an illustration of a basic permutation for an 8×8 mapping;

FIG. 6A is a flowchart depicting method steps of an embodiment for mapping numbers using basic permutations;

FIG. 6B is an example illustration of applying the method steps of FIG. 6A;

FIG. 7 is a flowchart depicting method steps of an embodiment of constructing a Latin square matrix;

FIG. 8 is a flowchart depicting method steps of an embodiment of a second method of constructing a Latin square matrix;

FIG. 9A depicts the various steps of transforming a number zero using a basic permutation list;

FIG. 9B is an example of an 8×8 Latin square matrix;

FIGS. 10A-10H are block diagrams of an embodiment of switch settings for an 8×8 baseline network;

FIGS. 11A-11H are block diagrams of an embodiment of switch settings for an 8×8 omega network; and

FIGS. 12A-12H are block diagrams of an embodiment of switch settings in an 8×8 indirect binary n-cube network.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In accordance one aspect of the invention, a method, system, and computer program product for constructing a Latin-square matrix used in a self-routing multistage interconnection network is presented. The matrix is used to send distinct messages from each node in the network to every other node in the network. The multistage interconnect network has “n” inputs, “n” outputs, and a number of stages, “m”, equal to the base-two logarithm of “n”. One or more vectors having “m” elements are constructed in which each element of each vector represents a switch state of a stage in the self-routing multistage interconnection network. Each vector corresponds to a unique combination of switch states in which each switch state is one of “cross” or “parallel”. Each element of each vector indicates a switch state for all switches of a particular stage in which all switches of the particular stage have the same switch setting. The “n” rows of a Latin-square matrix are constructed by determining the mapping of inputs to outputs of the self-routing multistage interconnection network in which the switch states are in accordance with the vectors. Each row in the matrix corresponds to a unique one of the vectors. Each row of the matrix also corresponds to outputs of the self-routing multistage interconnection network when switch states are set in accordance with the corresponding unique vector.

Thus there is described a technique for performing all-to-all personalized exchanges which is scalable while simultaneously seeking to minimize communication delays.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

Referring now to FIG. 1, shown is an embodiment of a processor with nodes communicating using a multistage interconnection network (MIN) 20. Within this example of a computer system 10 shown are processor nodes P₀ through P_(n−1) labeled 12-14. Conventional processors may be used in a preferred embodiment although the type of processor best suited for use may vary depending on particularities of a preferred embodiment and its application. These processor nodes communicate through the MIN 20. A processor node 12 provides an input I₀ into the MIN 20, and receives an output O₀ from the MIN 20. Similarly processor nodes P₁ through P_(n−1) provide inputs and receive outputs from the MIN 20. Generally the MIN 20 is used for interprocess communication between nodes P₀ through P_(n−1) as needed, for example, in performing parallel processing applications in the computer system 10.

Generally, the MIN 20 of computer system 10 can be chosen from a variety of networks, such as crossbar, Clos, Benes, baseline, omega, indirect binary n-cube. Although generally any MIN may be used for interprocess communication in a computer system 10 as depicted in FIG. 1, a preferred embodiment of the invention may also include those MIN networks which are members of a class of self-routing networks containing a unique path between each input/output pair in the network. Networks such as baseline, omega, and indirect binary n-cube, for example, are members of the class of self-routing networks. Other MIN network types such as the crossbar, Clos, and Benes network are not members of the self-routing network class. Although the crossbar and Clos network both can realize all possible permutations between network input and outputs, and have a constant communication latency, the network cost associated with the hardware of an n×n crossbar and a three-stage Clos network are O(n²) and O(n^(3/2)), respectively, 10 which are generally considered too high for large systems, for example, such as computer system with many processor nodes. A Benes network which has a network cost of O(n log n) may also realize all permutations, but not all permutations may be easily routed through the network and some rearrangements of existing connections may be needed. In addition, the Benes network may also be viewed as a concatanation of a baseline network and a reverse baseline network with the center stages overlapped. The Benes network typically has a network cost as well as the communication latency of approximately twice those of a baseline type of network.

The hardware for implementing the MIN 20 is straightforward to one skilled in the art given the description in text which follows. Generally, a MIN may include multistage switching elements.

Thus, a preferred embodiment of the invention may include any MIN network, or a specific type of MIN network, the self-routing network, such as a baseline, rather than non-self-routing networks, such as a Clos or Benes network. Although self-routing networks generally realize a proper subset of permutations of inputs and outputs, realization of a full permutation capability is not necessary in an all-to-all personalized exchange. It should be noted that the class of self-routing networks may prove to be a better choice in a particular preferred embodiment of the invention than non-self-routing networks.

In the paragraphs that follow, first presented is a generalized method for performing all-to-all communications using a MIN network. Subsequently, two methods for generating a Latin square matrix used in the generalized method of all-to-all communications are presented. A generic technique for generating Latin square matrices for use with self-routing networks is also disclosed. Generally, as will become apparent from the following descriptions, using a MIN facilitates interprocess communication over prior art approaches due to the shorter communication latency and better scalability.

It should generally be noted that the computer system 10 of FIG. 1 is only one embodiment of interprocess communication that may be used with the invention. Additionally, the processor 10 of FIG. 1 can include any number of nodes to facilitate any one of a variety of other uses such as, for example, parallel computing within the computer system 10.

Shown in FIGS. 2A-2C are three types of multistage interconnection networks that may be used in a preferred embodiment of the MIN in the computer system 10 of FIG. 1. As known to those skilled in the art, FIG. 2A shows a baseline network, FIG. 2B shows an omega network, and FIG. 2C shows an indirect binary n-cube network. In the example shown in FIGS. 2A-2C, an 8×8 network is illustrated. In particular, the “8×8” refers to the number of inputs and outputs, respectively, in and out of the network. As known to those skilled in the art, a typical network structure for the class of MINs has “n” equal to “2^(m)” inputs and outputs and “log(n)=m” stages, with each stage consisting of n/2, 2×2 switches, and any two adjacent stages connected by n-interstage links.

A permutation is a one-to-one mapping between the network inputs and outputs, as in FIGS. 1 and 2A-2C. For an n×n network, suppose there is a one-to-one mapping ρ which maps input i to output α_(i) (i.e. ρ(i)=α_(i)), where α_(i)ε{0, 1, . . . , n−1} for 0≦i≦n−1, and α_(i)≠α_(j) for i≠j.

Let $\rho = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & \cdots & {n - 1} \\ a_{0} & a_{1} & \cdots & a_{n - 1} \end{pmatrix}$

denote this permutation. In particular, when ρ (i)=i for 0≦i≦n−1, this permutation is referred to as an identity permutation and denoted as I.

Some properties and notations of permutations which will be used in following paragraphs are now noted. Given two permutations ρ₁ and ρ₂, a composition ρ₁ρ₂ of the two permutations is also a permutation, which maps i to ρ₁(ρ₂(i)). Clearly, ρI=I ρ=ρ, but in general ρ₁ρ₂≠ρ₂ρ₁. However, the associative law does apply here. That is, ρ₁(ρ₂ρ₃)=(ρ₁ρ₂)ρ₃. Let ρ^(i) denote the composition of i permutations ρ's. Also, if ρ₁ρ₂=I, ρ₁ is the inverse of ρ₂ and vice versa. This is denoted as ρ₁=ρ₂ ⁻¹ and ρ₂=ρ₁ ⁻¹. A permutation can also be expressed as a cycle or composition of several cycles. For example, in a 4×4 mapping, a cycle (0, 3, 2) represents a permutation in which 0, 3, and 2 are mapped to 3, 2, and 0, respectively, while 1 is kept unchanged. In addition, for representational convenience, the following notation is used to represent a mapping ρ(a)=b $a\overset{\rho}{\rightarrow}b$

In the context of a MIN, each stage in the network can be viewed as a shorter n×n network, and so does each set of interstage links. Let σ_(i)(0≦i≦m−1) denote the permutation represented by stage i, and π_(i)(0≦i≦m−2) denote the permutation represented by the set of interstage links between stage i and stage i+1. The permutation σ_(i) is referred to as stage permutation, the permutation π_(i) as an interstage permutation, and the permutation realized by the entire multistage interconnection network as an admissible permutation of the network. Clearly, an admissible permutation can be expressed by a composition of stage permutations and interstage permutations. For example, the admissible permutation of a baseline network can be expressed as

σ_(m−1)π_(m−2)σ_(m−2) . . . π₀σ₀  (1)

In general, interstage permutations π_(i)'s are fixed by the network topology. For a baseline network, suppose the binary representation of a number α ε {0,1, . . . , n−1} is ρ_(m−1)ρ_(m−2) . . . ρ₁ρ₀. Then the permutation π_(i) represents the following mapping: $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi_{i}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i}p_{0}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{2}p_{1}}} & (2) \end{matrix}$

This mapping corresponds to a 1-bit circular-right-shift among the m−i least significant bits while keeping the i most significant bits unchanged.

However, stage permutation σ_(i)'s are not fixed since each switch can be set to either parallel or cross. Thus σ_(i) can be a composition of any subset of cycles {(0, 1), (2, 3), . . . , (n−1, n)}, which implies that there are a total of 2^(n/2) possible choices for each σ_(i). It follows that by (1) the number of all admissible permutations of a baseline network is (2^(n/2))^(log n)=n^(n/2). This also holds for other networks with a similar structure, such as omega and indirect binary n-cube, shown in FIGS. 2B and 2C, respectively.

Referring now to FIG. 3, shown is a routing example of an 8×8 baseline network. Recall that FIG. 2A set forth an embodiment of an example baseline network, as used now in FIG. 3. In the MIN 20 of FIG. 3, there are stage permutations σ₀=(2, 3), σ₁=(0, 1)(4, 5), and σ₂=(0, 1) (2, 3) (4, 5) (6, 7), and interstage permutations (in both binary and decimal). $\begin{matrix} {\pi_{0} = \quad \begin{pmatrix} 000 & 001 & 010 & 011 & 100 & 101 & 110 & 111 \\ 000 & 100 & 001 & 101 & 010 & 110 & 011 & 111 \end{pmatrix}} \\ {= \quad \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 \\ 0 & 4 & 1 & 5 & 2 & 6 & 3 & 7 \end{pmatrix}} \\ {\pi_{1} = \quad \begin{pmatrix} 000 & 001 & 010 & 011 & 100 & 101 & 110 & 111 \\ 000 & 010 & 001 & 011 & 100 & 110 & 101 & 111 \end{pmatrix}} \\ {= \quad \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 \\ 0 & 2 & 1 & 3 & 4 & 6 & 5 & 7 \end{pmatrix}} \end{matrix}$

For input 0, the following transformation is obtained: $0\overset{\sigma_{0}}{\rightarrow}{0\overset{\pi_{0}}{\rightarrow}{0\overset{\sigma_{1}}{\rightarrow}{1\overset{\pi_{1}}{\rightarrow}{2\overset{\sigma_{2}}{\rightarrow}3}}}}$

that is, $0\overset{\sigma_{2}\pi_{1}\sigma_{1}\pi_{0}\sigma_{0}}{\rightarrow}3$

After computing the transformation for every input, the overall permutation obtained for the switch settings in the network is: ${\sigma_{2}\pi_{1}\sigma_{1}\pi_{0}\sigma_{0}} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 \\ 3 & 7 & 5 & 1 & 0 & 4 & 2 & 6 \end{pmatrix}$

An embodiment, as shown in FIG. 1, is used in all-to-all personalized exchange in a MIN of log-n stages. In following paragraphs, first discussed is the lower bound on the communication time for all-to-all personalized exchange in such a network, and then proposed is a technique for realizing all-to-all personalized exchange.

The following lemma concerns the lower bound on the maximum communication delay of all-to-all personalized exchange in a MIN.

Lemma 1 The maximum communication delay of all-to-all personalized exchange in an n×n network of log n stages is at least Ω(n+log n).

Proof. The lemma holds because each processor must receive one message from all other n−1 processors, which takes Ω(n) time, and each message must go through log n stages from its source processor to its destination processor, which takes Ω(log n) time.

A Latin square is defined as an n×n matrix $\begin{bmatrix} a_{0,0} & a_{0,1} & \cdots & a_{0,{n - 1}} \\ a_{1,0} & a_{1,1} & \cdots & a_{1,{n - 1}} \\ \vdots & \quad & \vdots & \vdots \\ a_{{n - 1},0} & a_{{n - 1},1} & \cdots & a_{{n - 1},{n - 1}} \end{bmatrix}$

in which the entries α_(ij)'s are numbers in {0, 1, 2, . . . , n−1} and no two entries in a row (or a column) have the same value. A Latin square may be described equivalently in a different way: for all i and j, 0≦j, 0≦i, j≦n−1, the entries of each row in the matrix, α_(i,0), α_(i,1), . . . , α_(i,n−1), form a permutation $\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 2 & \cdots & {n - 1} \\ a_{i,0} & a_{i,1} & a_{i,2} & \cdots & a_{i,{n - 1}} \end{pmatrix}$

and the entries of each column in the matrix, α_(0,j), α_(1,j), . . . , α_(n−1,j), also form a permutation $\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 2 & \cdots & {n - 1} \\ a_{0,j} & a_{1,j} & a_{2,j} & \cdots & a_{{n - 1},j} \end{pmatrix}$

Two Latin squares are equivalent if one can be transformed into another by swapping rows of its matrix. This concept is useful when considering different approaches to constructing a Latin square.

Generally, for a MIN under consideration, there exists a Latin square such that any permutation formed by each row of the matrix is admissible to the network. An all-to-all personalized exchange method (ATAPE) may be designed which is generic for the class of multistage interconnection networks (MINs). For simplicity in describing this embodiment, it is assumed that every message has the same length so that the message transmission at each stage is synchronized. Although this is true for the embodiment described herein, other preferred embodiments may have messages of differing length. A higher-level description of the ATAPE method is given in Table I in following text with corresponding method steps in FIGS. 4A and 4B.

Referring now to FIGS. 4A and 4B, shown are example method steps for performing all-to-all personalized exchange within the class of MINs. Generally, as previously described, the all-to-all personalized exchange method is a method for sending distinct messages from each processor to each other processor, for example, as in the computer system 10 of FIG. 1. As indicated at step 40, method steps 44-52 are performed by each processor, in parallel, for all processors, j, 0≦j≦n−1. Control proceeds to step 44 where a loop control variable i is initialized to 0. After step 44, control proceeds to step 46 where, for each α_(ij) in the Latin square matrix, a distinct personalized message is prepared to be sent from processor j to the processor denoted by the entry into the matrix α_(ij). Control proceeds to step 48 where the message is inserted into processor j's outgoing message queue. Control proceeds to step 50 where the local variable i is incremented by 1. Control proceeds to step 52 where a determination is made as to whether or not i is less than or equal to n−1. If a determination is made at step 52 that i is less than or equal to n−1, control proceeds back to step 46 where steps 46, 48, and 50 are again repeated until i reaches the quantity n. Note that steps 44, and the loop formed by steps, 46, 48, 50 and 52 are performed in parallel by each processor.

If a determination is made at step 52 that i is not less than or equal to the quantity of n−1, control proceeds to step 60 of FIG. 4B. As indicated at step 60, another set of steps, 62-68, are performed in parallel by each processor similar to those steps 44-52. At step 62, a local variable i is initialized to 0. At step 64, for the message with destination address a in processor j's outgoing message queue, the message is sent to processor α_(ij) through input j of the network. Subsequently, at step 66 the local variable i is incremented by 1. At step 68 a determination is made as to whether or not the quantity represented by i is less than or equal to the quantity of n−1. If a determination is made at step 68 that i is less than or equal to n−1, control proceeds to step 64. Steps 64 and 66 are repeated until the quantity represented by i is not less than or equal to n−1. When a determination is made at step 68 that i is not less than or equal to n−1, control proceeds to step 72 where the process depicted by FIGS. 4A and 4B terminates.

Table I: All-to-all personalized exchange method for a class of multistage interconnection networks

Method ATAPE begin Step 1. for each processor j (0 ≦ j ≦ n − 1) do in parallel 1.1 for each a_(ij) (0 ≦ i ≦ n − 1) in the Latin square do in sequential prepare a personalized message from processor j to processor a_(ij); insert the message into the message queue j; Step 2. for each processor j (0 ≦ j ≦ n − 1) do in parallel 2.1 for each message with destination address a_(ij) (0 ≦ i ≦ n − 1) in the message queue j do in sequential Send the message destined to a_(ij) through input j of the network; end;

In the foregoing Table I, the method steps depicted by ATAPE are represented in previously described FIGS. 4A and 4B. Generally, in method ATAPE, processor j sends distinct messages to all destinations in the order of α_(0,j), α_(1,j), . . . , α_(n−1,j), which corresponds to the column j of the Latin square. Generally, for method ATAPE in time frame i, all n processors send their messages simultaneously to destinations α_(i,0), α_(i,1), . . . , α_(i,n−1), which corresponds to the row i of the Latin square. In method ATAPE, all-to-all personalized exchange is achieved by realizing n permutations which correspond to the n rows of the Latin square, under the assumption that each permutation represented by a row of the Latin square is admissible to the network.

Note that, as previously described, a preferred embodiment may include a MIN which is self-routing. In this instance, the sequential steps of 2.1 may be performed in a pipelined fashion. This achieves a form of parallelism since two messages entering from two inputs of a switch may pass the switch simultaneously without any conflicts. Subsequently, once the previous n messages leave the switches of the current stage, the next n messages can enter the switches of this stage. Therefore, for self-routing networks, the time complexities of Step 1 and Step 2 are O(n) and O(n+log n), respectively. The total time delay for the all-to-all personalized exchange technique in self-routine networks is generally O(n+log n).

In the following text, described are methods for constructing the Latin square matrix as used in the all-to-all personalized exchange methods of FIGS. 4A and 4B previously described.

In following paragraphs, general terms and notation used throughout the application is described. Additionally, first and second methods for constructing a Latin square matrix, or Latin square, are set forth. It should be noted that although two methods are described herein, other methods known to those skilled in the art may also be used to construct a Latin square matrix that may be used, for example, in performing the methods steps of FIGS. 4A and 4B for network communications.

Defined is a set of basic permutations used for constructing a Latin square. For an n×n mapping, where n=2^(m), m basic permutations φ_(i) (1≦i≦m) are defined as follows. Let the binary representation of a number αε{0, 1, . . . , n−1} be ρ_(m−1)ρ_(m−2) . . . ρ₁ρ₀. Then $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i}p_{i - 1}p_{i - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i}p_{0}}\overset{\varphi_{i}}{}{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i}{\overset{\_}{p}}_{i - 1}p_{i - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i}p_{0}}} & (3) \end{matrix}$

The permutation φ_(i) is actually the operation flipping the i^(th) bit of a binary number. φ_(i) may also be expressed as a composition of $\frac{n}{2}$

2-cycles. For example, the three basic permutations for n=8 are φ₁ = (0, 1)  (2, 3)  (4, 5)  (6, 7) φ₂ = (0, 2)  (1, 3)  (4, 6)  (5, 7) φ₃ = (0, 4)  (1, 5)  (2, 6)  (3, 7)

Referring now to FIG. 5, shown is a pictorial representation of the foregoing permutations φ₁, φ₂, and φ₃.

Referring now to FIG. 6A, shown are steps of one method for mapping numbers using the basic permutation. The mapping of n numbers 0, 1, 2, . . . , n−1 by the basic permutation φ_(i) (1≦i≦m=log n) is performed as follows. Divide the entire segment containing all n numbers into 2^(m−i+1) subsegments with each subsegment containing 2^(i−1) consecutive numbers, as at step 80. Starting from subsegment 0, group each two consecutive subsegments into a pair, as in step 84. Subsequently, as in step 88, swap two subsegments in each pair. As an example of applying these method steps of FIG. 6A, consider φ₂ of FIG. 5. Divide eight numbers into four subsegments: ∥0,1∥, ∥2,3∥, ∥4,5∥ and ∥6,7∥. Then, swap the first pair of consecutive subsegments ∥0,1∥ and ∥2,3∥, and also swap the second pair of consecutive subsegments ∥4,5∥ and ∥6,7∥. Thus, φ₂ maps 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 respectively to 2, 3, 0, 1, 6, 7, 4, 5.

Referring now to FIG. 6B, shown is an example illustration of applying the method steps of FIG. 6A.

Prior to a description of using the basic permutations in constructing Latin squares, some relevant properties of basic permutations are described.

Lemma 2 The set of basic permutations φ_(i) (1≦i≦m) defined in (3) has the properties that the composition of any two basic permutations is exchangeable, and the composition of two identical basic permutations equals the identity permutation. That is,

φ_(i)φ_(j)=φ_(j)φ_(i), for 1≦i,j≦m  (4)

and

φ_(i)φ_(i) =I, for 1≦i≦m  (5)

Proof. The exchangeability (4) may be determined from the definition of the basic permutations. Generally, any binary number ρ_(m−1)ρ_(m−2) . . . ρ_(i−1) . . . ρ_(j−1) . . . ρ₁p₀ may be mapped to ρ_(m−1)ρ_(m−2) . . . {overscore (ρ)}_(i−1) . . . {overscore (p)}_(j−1) . . . ρ₁ρ₀ by either permutation φ_(i) φ_(j) or permutation φ_(j) φ_(i).

Similarly, equation (5) holds true because applying the composition of two φ_(i)'s implies first flipping the i^(th) bit and then flipping it back.

Both properties in Lemma 2 will be relevant to later text.

The construction of a Latin square by using the basic permutations is now discussed.

Given m basic permutations φ₁, φ₂, . . . φ_(m), a permutation set is constructed of compositions of basic permutations as follows

Ψ={φhd i ₁ φ_(i) ₂ . . . φ_(i) _(k) |m≧i ₁ >i ₂ > . . . >i _(k)≧1 and m≧k≧1}  (6)

For example, for n=8 there are

Ψ={φ₁, φ₂, φ₃, φ₂, φ₁, φ₃φ₁, φ₃φ₂, φ₃φ₂φ₁}

Based on the properties (4) and (5) in Lemma 2, any composition of one or more basic permutations equals one of the permutations in Ψ. For example, take the composition φ₁φ₂φ₁. Since

φ₁φ₂φ₁=(φ₁φ₂)φ₁=(φ₂φ₁)φ₁=φ₂(φ₁φ₁)=φ₂ I=φ ₂,

this composition equals φ₂ which belongs to Ψ.

Generally, in Ψ there are $\begin{pmatrix} m \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}$

permutations which are composed of one basic permutation, $\begin{pmatrix} m \\ 2 \end{pmatrix}$

permutations which are composed of two basic permutations, and so on. Since ${\begin{pmatrix} m \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} + \begin{pmatrix} m \\ 2 \end{pmatrix} + \ldots + \begin{pmatrix} m \\ m \end{pmatrix}} = {{2^{m} - 1} = {n - 1}}$

it follows that |Ψ|=n−1.

Based on the permutation set Ψ Latin squares may be constructed as described in the following theorem.

Theorem 1 Let ρ₁, ρ₂, . . . , ρ_(n−1) be the n−1 permutations in Ψ, and α₀, α₁, . . . , α_(n−1) be a list of numbers such that {α_(0″)α₁, . . . α_(n−1)}={0, 1, . . . , n−1}. Then the following matrix is Latin square. $\begin{matrix} \begin{bmatrix} a_{0} & a_{1} & a_{2} & \ldots & a_{n - 1} \\ {\rho_{1}\left( a_{0} \right)} & {\rho_{1}\left( a_{1} \right)} & {\rho_{1}\left( a_{2} \right)} & \ldots & {\rho_{1}\left( a_{n - 1} \right)} \\ {\rho_{2}\left( a_{0} \right)} & {\rho_{2}\left( a_{1} \right)} & {\rho_{2}\left( a_{2} \right)} & \ldots & {\rho_{2}\left( a_{n - 1} \right)} \\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots \\ {\rho_{n - 1}\left( a_{0} \right)} & {\rho_{n - 1}\left( a_{1} \right)} & {\rho_{n - 1}\left( a_{2} \right)} & \ldots & {\rho_{n - 1}\left( a_{n - 1} \right)} \end{bmatrix} & (7) \end{matrix}$

Proof. Since {α₀, α₁, . . . , α_(n−1)}={0, 1, . . . , n−1} and each ρ_(i) is a permutation, then the set of numbers in the i^(th) row of the matrix, {ρ_(i)(α₀), ρ_(i)(α₁), . . . , ρ_(i)(α_(n−1))}={0, 1, . . . , n−1}. That is, each row of the matrix forms a permutation.

Now consider the set of numbers in the j^(th) column of the matrix, {α_(j), ρ₁ (α_(j)), ρ₂(α_(j)), . . . , ρ_(n−1) (α_(j))}. By the definition of Ψ in (6) and the definition of φ_(i) in (3), given a ρ_(i), say, ρ_(i)=φ₄φ₂φ₁, then ρ_(i)(α_(j)) is the number obtained by flipping bit 4, bit 2 and bit 1 of the binary representation of number α_(j). Generally, since ρ₁, ρ₂, . . . , p_(n−1) represent permutations which may flip the bits of a number in all possible ways, α_(j), ρ₁ (α_(j)), ρ₂(α_(j)), . . . , ρ_(n−1) (α_(j)) together cover the numbers in {0, 1 , . . . , n−1}. Thus, the column of the matrix also forms a permutation. Hence, the matrix is a Latin square.

Referring now to FIG. 7, shown is an example of an embodiment of the method steps of a first method for constructing a Latin square matrix. In other words, the flowchart steps of FIG. 7 summarize that method which has just been described using equations 6 and 7 to produce a Latin square matrix. In step 100, the basic permutations, φ_(i)s, are calculated for i from 1 to m where m=log n. Recall that n is the dimension of the rows and columns in our n×n matrix and our n×n network. In step 104, Ψ is calculated using Equation 6. In step 108 the Latin square matrix is constructed with entries as defined using Equation 7 from Theorem 1.

The foregoing method for construction of a Latin square is generally useful in mathematically proving the existence of a Latin square for the MINs. However, the time complexity of generating a Latin square using this first technique may be quite high since each permutation in Ψ may contain up to m basic permutations. Therefore a second alternate method for constructing a Latin square matrix will now be described. The first technique generally has a greater time complexity than the second technique which will now be described.

The general technique of the second method for constructing a Latin square matrix will now be described. Referring now to FIG. 8, shown are the method steps of a second embodiment for constructing a Latin square matrix. At step 110, a permutation of the n elements α₀ . . . α_(n−1) is provided. Generally, as previously described, each of the elements α₀ . . . α_(n−1) corresponds to one of the processor nodes in the computer system 10, as in FIG. 1. In the next step 112, a list of basic permutations is built. Each of the basic permutations, as previously described, is a function providing a mapping of one of the processor nodes to another processor node. In this particular instance the list of basic permutations generates a list whose right-most bits form a Gray code sequence. This will be described in more detail in following text. At step 114, the first row of the Latin square matrix is constructed using the original permutation list as provided in step 110. The method proceeds to step 116 where successive rows of the Latin square matrix are built using the immediately preceding row and the basic permutation list. The basic permutations, for example at step 116, provide a mapping of a current row of the Latin square matrix to an immediately successive row of the Latin square matrix.

Generally, the method steps depicted in FIG. 8 construct a Latin square matrix in a row-by-row iterative fashion in the sense that the current row is obtained by applying a basic permutation in the list to a previously generated row. Details of each of these previously described steps of FIG. 8 are described in text which follows. It should be noted that since there are a total of n−1 basic permutations in the list and each of them is applied to n entries of a row, the time complexity of the construction of this method is of O(n²).

Following is Table II which contains a pseudo-code type description of the second technique for producing a Latin square matrix, as generally described in conjunction with FIG. 8.

TABLE II The construction of a Latin square matrix method LatinSquare (List {a₀, a₁, . . . , a_(n-1)})/* main */ begin ListBL <--- List { }; BuildBasicList (m); /* m = log n */ BuildLatinSquare(BL, {a₀, a₁, . . . , a_(n-1)}); end; Function BuildBasicList (int k) begin if (k == 1) BL.append (₁); return; end if BuildBasicList (k − 1); BL.append (_(k)); BuildBasicList (k − 1); end; Function BuildLatinSquare(List{_(k1), φ_(k2), . . . , φ_(kn-1)}, List{a₀, a₁, . . . , a_(n-1)}) begin for i = 0 to n − 1 do if (i == 0) b₀ = a₀; b₁ = a₁; . . . ; b_(n-1 = a) _(n-1); else b₀ = φ_(ki)(b₀); b_(1 = φ) _(ki)(b₁); . . . ; b_(n-1) = φ_(ki)(b_(n-1)); end if; output List{b₀, b₁, . . . , b_(n-1)} as one row of the Latin square; end for; end;

Following is a proof that this second technique produces a Latin square matrix.

Theorem 2 The matrix constructed by the method of Latin square in Table II is a Latin square.

Proof. First to be shown is that the number of basic permutations generated by function BuildBasicList (k) is 2^(k)−1 so that there are 2^(m)−1=n−1 basic permutations in the list passed to function BuildLatinSquare in main program LatinSquare. Let this number be P(k), then the following recurrence can be established as

P(k)=2P(k−1)+1 and P(1)=1  (8)

The solution to the recurrence of equation (8) is 2^(k)−1.

The LatinSquare method of Table II generates an n×n matrix by applying the basic permutation list to the original row, α₀, α₁, . . . , α_(n−1), in an iterative way. To prove the matrix generated is a Latin square, first focus on the case of applying the basic permutation list to a number α_(j) iteratively. The first permutation in the list is applied to number α_(j) to obtain a new number. Subsequently, the second permutation is applied to this new number to obtain another number; and so on. After exhausting the basic permutations in the list, a list of numbers is obtained which forms a column of the matrix.

Now described is the basic permutation list which contains the operations which generate a Gray code sequence. A k-bit Gray code sequence contains 2^(k) binary codewords, each of length k bits, in which two adjacent codewords differ in exactly one bit. For example, consider the basic permutation list {φ₁, φ₂, φ₁, φ₃, φ₁, φ₂, φ₁} for n=8. Referring now to FIG. 9A, shown are steps applying this list to number 0 to obtain {000, 001, 011, 010, 110, 111, 101, 100} in binary.

Generally, the following claim may be proven by induction: applying the basic permutation list outputted by BuildBasicList(k) to an m-bit binary number, p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p₁p₀, generates a list of the numbers of form $p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{k}\quad \overset{k}{\overset{\_}{{x\quad x\quad \ldots \quad x},}}$

whose k rightmost bits form a k-bit Gray code sequence. Note that the foregoing “k” above the string of “xx . . . x” is notation used to indicate the “k” rightmost bits in which each “x” in the “xx . . . x” denotes a bit.

First notice that given a binary number b and a basic permutation φ_(i), b and φ_(i)(b) differ only in the i^(th) bit. When k=1, there is only permutation φ₁, and the rightmost bit of the numbers generated p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p₁x, form a list {0, 1} which is a 1-bit Gray code sequence. Assume the claim holds true for k−1. Now consider BuildBasicList(k). After the first call of BuildBasicList (k−1), there is a permutation list which generally generates numbers of form $p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{k}p_{k - 1}\quad \overset{k - 1}{\overset{\_}{{x\quad x\quad \ldots \quad x},}}$

whose (k−1) rightmost bits form a (k−1) bit Gray code sequence. Then add φ_(k) to the permutation list. Apply φ_(k) to the previous number by flipping the k^(th) bit of the number to obtain a new number. Next, call BuildBasicList (k−1) again to add to the permutation list those permutations which may generate all numbers of form $p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{k}{\overset{\_}{p}}_{k - 1}\quad \overset{k - 1}{\overset{\_}{x\quad x\quad \ldots \quad x}}$

whose (k−1) rightmost bits form a (k−1)-bit Gray code sequence. Thus, the resulting permutation list generates all numbers of the form $p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{k}\quad \overset{k}{\overset{\_}{{x\quad x\quad \ldots \quad x},}}$

whose k rightmost bits form a k-bit Gray code sequence. It should be noted that the bar or line over the p_(k−1) represents the complement or negation operation.

In the LatinSquare of Table II, the basic permutation list outputed by BuildBasicList (m) is applied to any α_(j) (0≦α_(j)≦n−1) in the original row, the resulting number list, which is column j of the matrix obtained by the method, consists of numbers of an m-bit Gray code sequence which covers {0, 1, . . . , n−1}.

Additionally, the original row α₀, α₁, . . . , α_(n−1) includes the members of {0, 1, . . . , n−1}, so does each of the other n−1 rows of the matrix. Thus, the resulting matrix is a Latin square.

Referring now to FIG. 9B, shown is a Latin square generated by method LatinSquare of Table II.

Theorem 3 The Latin square in Theorem 2 is equivalent to that in Theorem 1.

Proof. Let the basic permutation list in Table II LatinSquare be

{φ_(k) ₁ , φ_(k) ₂ , . . . , φ_(k) _(n−1) }.

Then the set of permutations which are applied to the original number list {α₀, α₁, . . . , α_(n−1)} in the method is

ψ′={φ_(k) ₁ , φ_(k) ₂ φ_(k) ₁ , φ_(k) ₃ φ_(k) ₂ φ_(k) ₁ , . . . , φ_(k) _(n−1) , φ_(k) _(n−2) . . . φ_(k) ₂ φ_(k) ₁ }

By Theorem 2, no two permutations in Ψ′ are the same, which yields

|Ψ′|=n−1=|Ψ|.

Also using the properties (4) and (5) of basic permutations, any permutation in Ψ′ can be transformed to the format of Ψ in (6). That is,

Ψ′=Ψ

Thus, the Latin squares in Theorem 2 and Theorem 1 are equivalent.

An example to illustrate the proof of Theorem 3 is now given. For n=8, the basic permutation list is {φ₁, φ₂, φ₁, φ₃, φ₁, φ₂, φ₁}. The following one-to-one correspondence between Ψ′ and Ψ may be listed as: $\begin{matrix} {\Psi^{\prime} =} & \Psi \\ {\varphi_{1} =} & \varphi_{1} \\ {{\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} =} & {\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} \\ {{\varphi_{1}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} =} & \varphi_{2} \\ {{\varphi_{3}\varphi_{1}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} =} & {\varphi_{3}\varphi_{2}} \\ {{\varphi_{1}\varphi_{3}\varphi_{1}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} =} & {\varphi_{3}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} \\ {{\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}\varphi_{3}\varphi_{1}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} =} & {\varphi_{3}\varphi_{1}} \\ {{\varphi_{1}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}\varphi_{3}\varphi_{1}\varphi_{2}\varphi_{1}} =} & \varphi_{3} \end{matrix}$

The set of basic permutations φ_(i)(1≦i≦m) and the Latin square matrix produced, for example, using the two methods previously described, are closely related to the class of self-routing MINs. Generally, admissible permutations for the class of self-routing MINs may be generated in a generic way to form the Latin square needed in the all-to-all personalized exchange method of Table I. In paragraphs that follow, set forth is a description of this generic way to generate Latin square matrices which may be used in self-routing MINs for all-to-all personalized exchange.

Generally, let each stage permutation, (as previously defined) σ_(i)=φ₁ or I. Recall that φ₁ is the permutation (0, 1) (2, 3) . . . (n−2, n−1), and I is the identity permutation. Accordingly, all switches in each stage of the network are set to either cross or parallel to correspond, respectively, to φ_(i) and I.

In paragraphs that follow, it will be shown that this generic method for generating admissible permutations for use in a Latin square matrix is valid for baseline, omega and indirect binary n-cube networks. In fact, this approach may be generally applied to the entire class of self-routing MINs.

Recall, as set forth in previous descriptions included herein, the overall permutation of a baseline network is or σ_(m−1) π_(m−2) σ_(m−2) . . . π₀σ₀, where interstage permutations π_(i)'s are defined in (2) and the stage permutations σ_(i)'s now take either φ₁ or I. The following lemmas represent properties of the compositions of π_(i)'s and φ_(i)'s.

Lemma 3 The composition of i(1≦i≦m−1) consecutive interstage permutations π_(m−2) π_(m−3), . . . , π_(m−i+1) is the following permutation $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{i}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{o}}\overset{\pi_{m - 2}\pi_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad \pi_{m - i - 1}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{0}p_{1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i}}} & (9) \end{matrix}$

Proof. Applying π_(m−i−1), π_(m−i), . . . , π_(m−3), π_(m−2) one by one to a number p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p₁p₀, then $\begin{matrix} {{{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{i}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi_{m - i - 1}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{0}p_{i}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}}\overset{\pi_{m - i}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{0}p_{1}p_{i}\quad \ldots \quad p_{3}p_{2}}\overset{\pi_{m - i + 1}}{\rightarrow}{\ldots \overset{\pi_{m - 3}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{0}p_{1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 2}p_{i}p_{i - 1}}\overset{\pi_{m - 2}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 1}p_{0}p_{1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i - 1}p_{i}}}}}}}\quad} & \quad \\ {{\text{Let}\quad \pi} = {\pi_{m - 2}\pi_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad \pi_{1}\pi_{0}}} & (10) \end{matrix}$

which is the composition of all π_(i)'s. π may also be viewed as the overall permutation of a baseline network in which all switches are set to parallel.

The following Corollary gives a special case of Lemma 3, which indicates that π maps a binary number to its inverse. Corollary 1 $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi}{\rightarrow}{p_{0}p_{1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - 2}p_{m - 1}}} & (11) \end{matrix}$

Corollary 2 The composition of the i(1≦i≦m−1) consecutive π_(i)'s and φ₁ satisfies the following equation:

(π_(m−2) π_(m−3) . . . π_(m−i−1))φ₁=φ_(i+1)(π_(m−2) π_(m−3) . . . π_(m−i−1))

Proof. From Lemma 3 and mapping (3), it can be determined that the permutations on both sides of ( 12) map p_(m−1) p_(m−2) . . . p₁p₀ to p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p_(i+1) {overscore (p)}₀p₁ . . . p_(i).

Theorem 4 Let the stage permutation of each stage in a baseline network take either φ₁ or I (i.e., the switches in this stage are either all set to cross or all set to parallel). The admissible permutations that correspond to these switch settings form a Latin square.

Proof. Since each stage permutation σ_(i) takes either φ₁ or I, the overall permutation or σ_(m−1) π_(m−2) σ_(m−2) . . . π₀ σ₀ has the following general form for k≧1 and 0≦i₁<i₂< . . . <i_(k)≦m−1

π_(m−2) . . . π_(m−i) ₁ ⁻¹ . . . φ₁π_(m−i) ₁ ⁻² . . . π_(m−i) ₂ ⁻¹φ₁ π_(m−i) ₂ ⁻² . . . π_(m−i) _(k) ⁻¹φ₁π_(m−i) _(k) ⁻² . . . π₁π₀  (13)

Notice that when i₁=0, (13) becomes

φ₁π_(m−2) . . . π_(m−i) ₂ ⁻¹φ₁π_(m−i) ₂ ⁻² . . . π_(m−i) _(k) ⁻¹φ₁π_(m−i) _(k) ⁻² . . . π₁π₀

By repeatedly using Corollary 2, (13) becomes

(φ_(i) ₁ ₊₁φ_(i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(i) _(k) ₊₁)(π_(m−2)π_(m−3) . . . π₁π₀)=(φ_(i) ₁ ₊₁φ_(i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(i) _(k) ₊₁)π=(φ_(i) _(k) ₊₁φ_(i) _(k−1) ₊₁ . . . φ_(i) ₁ ₊₁)π

Comparing the set

 {φ_(i) _(k) ₊₁φ_(i) _(k−1) ₊₁ . . . φ_(i) ₁ ₊₁1k≧1, 0≦i ₁ <i ₂ < . . . <i _(k) ≦m−1}

with the definition of Ψ in (6), it can be determined they are equivalent. Letting α₀=π(0), α₁=π(1), . . . ,α_(n−1)=π(n−1), and using Theorem 1, all permutations of form (13) form a Latin square. Additionally π corresponds to the first row of the Latin square.

The second method of Table II LatinSquare(List {π(0), π(1), . . . , π(n−1)}) may be used to construct the Latin square for a baseline network. For example, for an 8×8 network, the first row, π(0), π(1), . . . , π(n−1), is computed by Corollary 1, which is 0, 4, 2, 6, 1, 5, 3, 7. LatinSquare is then called to generate the remaining n−1 rows of the Latin square.

Referring now to FIGS. 10A-10H, possible switch settings for an 8×8 baseline network are shown. The corresponding Latin square is L₁ of (14) below. L₂ and L₃ in (14) will be used in the following paragraphs setting forth descriptions involving different networks. $\begin{matrix} {{L_{1} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 4 & 2 & 6 & 1 & 5 & 3 & 7 \\ 1 & 5 & 3 & 7 & 0 & 4 & 2 & 6 \\ 3 & 7 & 1 & 5 & 2 & 6 & 0 & 4 \\ 2 & 6 & 0 & 4 & 3 & 7 & 1 & 5 \\ 6 & 2 & 4 & 0 & 7 & 3 & 5 & 1 \\ 7 & 3 & 5 & 1 & 6 & 2 & 4 & 0 \\ 5 & 1 & 7 & 3 & 4 & 0 & 6 & 2 \\ 4 & 0 & 6 & 2 & 5 & 1 & 7 & 3 \end{bmatrix}}\quad {L_{2} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 \\ 1 & 0 & 3 & 2 & 5 & 4 & 7 & 6 \\ 3 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 7 & 6 & 5 & 4 \\ 2 & 3 & 0 & 1 & 6 & 7 & 4 & 5 \\ 6 & 7 & 4 & 5 & 2 & 3 & 0 & 1 \\ 7 & 6 & 5 & 4 & 3 & 2 & 1 & 0 \\ 5 & 4 & 7 & 6 & 1 & 0 & 3 & 2 \\ 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 \end{bmatrix}}\quad {L_{3} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 2 & 4 & 6 & 1 & 3 & 5 & 7 \\ 1 & 3 & 5 & 7 & 0 & 2 & 4 & 6 \\ 5 & 7 & 1 & 3 & 4 & 6 & 0 & 2 \\ 4 & 6 & 0 & 2 & 5 & 7 & 1 & 3 \\ 6 & 4 & 2 & 0 & 7 & 5 & 3 & 1 \\ 7 & 5 & 3 & 1 & 6 & 4 & 2 & 0 \\ 3 & 1 & 7 & 5 & 2 & 0 & 6 & 4 \\ 2 & 0 & 6 & 4 & 3 & 1 & 7 & 5 \end{bmatrix}}} & (14) \end{matrix}$

Referring back to FIG. 2B, an omega network is depicted. In an n×n omega network, each of the log n interstage permutations is a shuffle function which is exactly π₀ ⁻¹, where π₀ is defined in (2). In fact, π₀ ⁻¹is a 1-bit circular-left-shift operation, that is, $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi_{0}^{- 1}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 2}p_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}p_{m - 1}}} & (15) \end{matrix}$

The overall permutation of an omega network is σ_(m−1) π₀ ⁻¹ σ_(m−2) π₀ ⁻¹ . . . σ₁π₀ ⁻¹ σ₀π₀ ⁻¹. Let π₀ ^(−i) denote the composition of i permutations π₀ ⁻¹ _(s).

Lemma 4

π₀ ^(−i)φ₁=φ_(i+1)π₀ ^(−i) for ≦i≦m−1  (16)

π₀ ^(−m) =I  (17)

Proof. When repeatedly applying π₀ ⁻¹ to a binary number p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p₁p₀, obtained is: ${p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi_{0}^{- 1}}{\rightarrow}{{P_{m - 2}p_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}p_{m - 1}}\overset{\pi_{0}^{- 1}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}}\overset{\pi_{0}^{- 1}}{\rightarrow}\quad \ldots}}$

In general, for 0≦i≦m−1, $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi_{0}^{- i}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - i - 1}p_{m - i - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i}}} & (18) \end{matrix}$

Letting i=m−1 and applying π₀ ⁻¹ one more time, (17) holds true.

To prove (16), in one instance there is ${p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\pi_{0}^{- i}\varphi_{1}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - i - 1}p_{m - i - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}\overset{\_}{p_{0}}p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i}}$

In another instance, by applying φ_(i+1) π₀ ^(−i) to p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p₁p₀, p_(m−i−1)p_(m−i−2) . . . p₁{overscore (p₀)}p_(m−1) . . . p_(m −i) may also be obtained. Therefore, equation π₀ ^(−i)φ₁=φ_(i+1) π₀ ^(−i) holds true.

Note that π₀ ^(−m) is the overall permutation of an omega network in which all switches are set to parallel. By (17), this permutation equals the identity permutation.

A theorem for omega networks exists which is similar to theorem 4 for baseline networks.

Theorem 5 Let the stage permutation of each stage in an omega network take either φ₁ or I (i.e., the switches in this stage are either all set to cross or all set to parallel). The admissible permutations that correspond to these switch settings form a Latin square.

Proof. Since each stage permutation σ_(i) takes either φ₁ or I, the overall permutation takes the following format for k≧2, i₁≧0, i₂, . . . , i_(k)≧1, and i₁+i₂+ . . . +i_(k)=m

 π₀ ^(−i) ^(₁) φ₁π₀ ^(−i) ^(₂) φ₁ . . . π₀ ^(−i) ^(_(k−1)) φ₁π₀ ^(−i) ^(_(k))   (19)

By repeatedly using Lemma 4, $\pi_{0}^{- i_{1}}\varphi_{1}\pi_{0}^{- i_{2}}\varphi_{1}\quad \ldots \quad \pi_{0}^{- i_{k - 1}}\varphi_{1}\pi_{0}^{- i_{k}}{{by}_{=}(16)}\varphi_{i_{1} + 1}\varphi_{{({i_{1} + i_{2}})} + 1}\varphi_{{({i_{1} + i_{2} + i_{3}})} + 1}\quad {{\ldots {\quad {\varphi_{{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{k - 1}i_{j}} + 1}\pi_{0}^{- m}{{by}_{=}(17)}\varphi_{i + 1}\varphi_{{({i_{1} + i_{2}})} + 1}\varphi_{{({i_{1} + i_{2} + i_{3}})} + 1}\quad \ldots {\quad {\varphi_{{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{k - 1}i_{j}} + 1}{{by}_{=}(4)}\varphi_{{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{k - 1}i_{j}} + 1}\varphi_{{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{k - 2}i_{j}} + 1}\quad \ldots \quad \varphi_{{({i_{1} + i_{2}})} + 1}\varphi_{i_{1} + 1}}}}}}}$

It may be verified that the set $\left. {{{\left\{ {\varphi_{{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{k - 1}i_{j}} + 1}\varphi_{{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{k - 2}i_{j}} + 1}\quad \ldots \quad \varphi_{{({i_{1} + i_{2}})} + 1}\varphi_{i_{1} + 1}} \right.k} \geq 2},{i_{1} \geq 0},{{i_{2}\quad \ldots \quad i_{k}} \geq 1},{{i_{1} + i_{2} + \ldots + i_{k}} = m}} \right\}$

is equal to Ψ in (6). Letting α₀=0, α₁=1, . . . , α_(n−1)=n−1, and using Theorem 1, all permutations of form (19) form a Latin square.

The method LatinSquare(List {0, 1, 2, . . . , n−1}) of Table II may be used to construct the Latin square for an omega network. Referring now to FIGS. 11A-11H, switch settings in an 8×8 omega network are depicted. The corresponding Latin square is L2 in (14), as previously set forth.

In following paragraphs, a description regarding the generic method for self-routing networks as used with an indirect binary n-cube network. Let τ_(i) denote the interstage permutation between stage i and i+1 for 0≦i≦m−2 in an indirect binary n-cube network. τ_(i) represents the following mapping $\begin{matrix} {{{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 2}p_{i + 1}p_{i}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\tau_{i}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{i + 2}p_{0}p_{i}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{i + 1}}},} & (20) \end{matrix}$

which is the function of swapping bit 1 and bit i+2. Similar to a baseline network, the overall permutation of an indirect binary n-cube network is σ_(m−1) τ_(m−2) σ_(m−2) . . . τ₀ σ₀, and the stage permutations σ_(i)'s are now taking either φ₁ or I. Let

τ=τ_(m−2)τ_(m−3) . . . τ₁τ₀  (21)

which is the overall permutation corresponding to that all switches in the network are set to parallel.

Lemma 5 The composition of i(1≦i≦m−1) consecutive interstage permutations τ_(m−2), τ_(m−3), . . . , τ_(m−i−1) is the following permutation $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 1}p_{m - i}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\tau_{m - 2}\tau_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad \tau_{m - i - 1}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 1}p_{m - i}p_{0}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{2}p_{1}p_{m - 1}}} & (22) \end{matrix}$

Proof. Applying τ_(m−i−1), τ_(m−i), . . . τ_(m−3), τ_(m−2) one by one to a binary number p_(m−1)p_(m−2) . . . p₁p₀, then ${p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 1}p_{m - i}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\tau_{m - i - 1}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 1}p_{0}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{m - 1}}\overset{\tau_{m - i}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 2}p_{m - i}p_{0}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{m - i + 1}}\overset{\tau_{m - i + 1}}{\rightarrow}\quad {\ldots \overset{\tau_{m - 3}}{\rightarrow}{{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 3}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 1}p_{m - i}p_{0}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{m - 2}}\overset{\tau_{m - 2}}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{m - i + 1}p_{m - i}p_{0}p_{m - i - 1}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{m - 1}}}}}}$

The following Corollary indicates that τ defined in (21) is actually a 1-bit circular-left-shift operation. Corollary 3 $\begin{matrix} {{p_{m - 1}p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{1}p_{0}}\overset{\tau}{\rightarrow}{p_{m - 2}\quad \ldots \quad p_{2}p_{1}p_{0}p_{m - 1}}} & (23) \end{matrix}$

Proof. Letting i=m−1 in Lemma 5.

Corollary 4 The composition of the i(1≦i≦m−1) consecutive τ_(j)'s and φ₁ satisfies the following equation:

(τ_(m−2)τ_(m−3) . . . τ_(m−i−1))φ₁=φ_(m−i+1)(τ_(m−2)τ_(m−3) . . . τ_(m−i−1))  (24)

Proof. By Lemma 5 and the definition of φ_(i) in (3), both permutations map

p _(m−1) p _(m−2) . . . p ₁ p ₀

to

p _(m−2) . . . p _(m−i+1) {overscore (p₀)} p _(m−i−1) . . . p ₁ p _(m−1)

Theorem 6 Let the stage permutation of each stage in an indirect binary n-cube network take either φ₁ or I (i.e., the switches in this stage are either all set to cross or all set to parallel). The admissible permutations that correspond to these switch settings form a Latin square.

Proof. Since each stage permutation τ_(i) takes either φ₁ or I, the overall permutation σ_(m−1) τ_(m−2) σ_(m−2) . . . τ₀σ₀ has the following general form for k≧1 and 0≦i₁< . . . <i_(k)≦m−1

τ_(m−2) . . . τ_(m−i) ₁ ⁻¹φ₁τ_(m−i) ₁ ⁻² . . . τ_(m−i) ₂ ⁻¹φ₁τ_(m−i) ₂ ⁻² . . . τ_(m−i) _(k) ⁻¹φ₁τ_(m−i) _(k) ⁻² . . . τ₁τ₀  (25)

Notice that when i₁=0, (25) becomes

φ₁τ_(m−2) . . . τ_(m−i) ₂ ⁻¹φ₁τ_(m−i) ₂ ⁻² . . . τ_(m−i) _(k) ⁻¹φ₁τ_(m−i) _(k) ⁻² . . . τ₁τ₀

by repeatedly using Corollary 4, (25) becomes

(φ_(m−i) ₁ ₊₁φ_(m−i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(m−i) _(k) ₊₁)(τ_(m−2)τ⁻³ . . . τ₁τ₀)−(φ_(m−i) ₁ ₊₁φ_(m−i) ₂ ₊₁φ_(m−i) _(k) ₊₁)τ for i ₁≧1

or

(φ₁φ_(m−i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(m−i) _(k) ₊₁)τ=(φ_(m−i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(m−i) _(k) ₊₁ . . . φ₁)τ for i ₁=0.

Comparing the set

{φ_(m−i) ₁ ₊₁φ_(m−i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(m−i) _(k) ₊₁ |k≧1, 1≦i ₁ <i ₂ < . . . <i _(k) ≦m−1}

∪{φ_(m−i) ₂ ₊₁ . . . φ_(m−i) _(k) ₊₁φ₁ |k≧1, 0=i ₁ <i ₂ < . . . <i _(k) ≦m−1}

with the definition of Ψ in (6), it can be determined that they are equivalent. Letting α₀=τ(0), α₁=τ(1), . . . , α_(n−1)=τ(n−1) and using Theorem 1, all permutations of form (13) form a Latin square. Moreover, τ corresponds to the first row of the Latin square.

Method 2 of Table II LatinSquare(List {τ(0), τ(1), . . . , τ(n−1)}) may be used to construct the Latin square for an indirect binary n-cube network. Referring now to FIGS. 12A-12H in FIG. 9, possible switch settings in an 8×8 indirect binary n-cube network are depicted. The corresponding Latin square is L3 in (14).

In following paragraphs, summarized is the general time complexity of the all-to-all personalized exchange method for the MIN subclass of self-routing networks. Generally, the method for an all-to-all personalized exchange using self-routing networks takes O(n+log n)=O(n) time, which matches the lower bound for this type of network within a constant factor. Constructing a Latin square matrix using the second method as previously described takes O(n²) time. Note that the Latin square construction methods previously described may be run once off-line at the time a network is built, and the Latin square matrix associated with the network may be viewed as one of the system parameters. Therefore, the time complexity of this method is not included in the communication delay.

Now the time complexity of the all-to-all personalized exchange method as used in a self-routing MIN network is generally compared with known techniques for other network topologies, including hypercube and 2D and 3D mesh/torus networks. In addition, also compared are the node degree, which reflects the number of I/O ports of each node, and the diameter, which is related to data transmission time. The comparison results are listed in Table III.

TABLE III Comparisons of various networks used for all-to-all personalized exchange Hypercube Hypercube 3D Network type 1-port model all-port model 2D mesh/torus mesh/torus Baseline, etc. Node degree log n log n 4 6 1 Diameter/No. log n log n O (n^(1/2)) O (n^(1/3)) log n Stages Communication O (n log n) O (n) O (n^(3/2)) O (n^(4/3)) O (n) delay

From Table III, the previously disclosed methods for the class of self-routing multistage interconnection networks (MINS) achieves a lower time complexity for all-to-all personalized exchange than with other network types. In terms of node degree, which reflects the scalability of a network, the MIN networks previously described are comparable to a mesh or a torus, while a hypercube has a node degree of log n. Thus, a multistage interconnection network (MIN), particularly a self-routing MIN, may generally be a good choice for implementing all-to-all personalized exchange due to its short communication delay and scalability.

In this application, presented is an all-to-all personalized exchange method for use with the class of MINs. The new method is based on a Latin square matrix, which corresponds to a set of admissible permutations of a MIN and may be viewed as a system parameter of the network. Disclosed are first and second methods for constructing the Latin square matrix used in the personalized exchange technique. Also disclosed is a generic method for decomposing all-to-all personalized exchange pattern into admissible permutations to form the Latin square matrix for a subclass of the MIN class, those self-routing or unique path networks. By taking advantage of the property of a MIN having a single input/output port per node, the MIN is useful and efficient in implementing all-to-all personalized exchange due to its shorter communication latency and better scalability than non-MI networks.

The foregoing description sets forth a technique using a MIN network that affords a flexible and efficient way of performing all-to-all communications using a Latin Square matrix for use in a variety of embodiments. Additionally, two techniques for generating a Latin square matrix were set forth. These two techniques afford a flexible way for generating a Latin square matrix that may be used in any type of MIN network. Additionally, for a particular type of MIN network, the self-routing network, a generic technique is described which affords a flexible and efficient method of generating admissible permutations that are included in a Latin square matrix for performing all-to-all personalized message exchange.

The foregoing technique for performing all-to-all personalized message exchange is scalable for use in applications with a large number of nodes that communicate while simultaneously minimizing the communication delay.

Having described preferred embodiments of the invention, it will now become apparent to those of skill in the art that other embodiments incorporating its concepts may be provided. It is felt, therefore, that this invention should not be limited to the disclosed embodiments, but rather should be limited only by the spirit and scope of the appended claims. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of constructing a Latin square matrix having n rows and n columns used in a self-routing multistage interconnection network to send distinct messages from each node in the network to every other node in the network, said self-routing multistage interconnection network having n inputs, n outputs, and a number of stages, m, equal to the base-two-logarithm of n, the method comprising: constructing one or more vectors, each vector having m elements in which each element of said each vector represents a switch state of a stage in said self-routing multistage interconnection network, said switch state being one of cross or parallel, each of said one or more vectors corresponding to a unique combination of switch states in which each switch state is one of cross or parallel, each element of each vector indicating a switch state for all switches of a particular stage in which all switches of the particular stage have the same switch setting, and constructing n rows of said Latin square matrix by determining the mapping of inputs to outputs of said self-routing multistage interconnection network in which said switch states are in accordance with those of said one or more vectors, each of said n rows of said Latin square matrix corresponding to a unique one of said vectors, and said each of said n rows corresponding to outputs of said self-routing multistage interconnection network when switch states are set in accordance with said unique one of said vectors.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is an omega network.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is a baseline network.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is an indirect binary n-cube network.
 5. A computer program product for constructing a Latin square matrix having n rows and n columns used in a self-routing multistage interconnection network to send distinct messages from each node in the network to every other node in the network, said self-routing multistage interconnection network having n inputs, n outputs, and a number of stages, m, equal to the base-two-logarithm of n, the computer program product comprising: machine executable instructions for constructing one or more vectors, each vector having m elements in which each element of said each vector represents a switch state of a stage in said self-routing multistage interconnection network, said switch state being one of cross or parallel, each of said one or more vectors corresponding to a unique combination of switch states in which each switch state is one of cross or parallel, each element of each vector indicating a switch state for all switches of a particular stage in which all switches of the particular stage have the same switch setting; and machine executable code for constructing n rows of said Latin square matrix by determining the mapping of inputs to outputs of said self-routing multistage interconnection network in which said switch states are in accordance with those of said one or more vectors, each of said n rows of said Latin square matrix corresponding to a unique one of said vectors, and said each of said n rows corresponding to outputs of said self-routing multistage interconnection network when switch states are set in accordance with said unique one of said vectors.
 6. The computer program product of claim 5, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is an omega network.
 7. The computer program product of claim 5, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is a baseline network.
 8. The computer program product of claim 5, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is an indirect binary n-cube network.
 9. A system for constructing a Latin square matrix having n rows and n columns used in a self-routing multistage interconnection network to send distinct messages from each node in the network to every other node in the network, said self-routing multistage interconnection network having n inputs, n outputs, and a number of stages, m, equal to the base-two-logarithm of n, the system comprising: means for constructing one or more vectors, each vector having m elements in which each element of said each vector represents a switch state of a stage in said self-routing multistage interconnection network, said switch state being one of cross or parallel, each of said one or more vectors corresponding to a unique combination of switch states in which each switch state is one of cross or parallel, each element of each vector indicating a switch state for all switches of a particular stage in which all switches of the particular stage have the same switch setting; and means for constructing n rows of said Latin square matrix by determining the mapping of inputs to outputs of said self-routing multistage interconnection network in which said switch states are in accordance with those of said one or more vectors, each of said n rows of said Latin square matrix corresponding to a unique one of said vectors, and said each of said n rows corresponding to outputs of said self-routing multistage interconnection network when switch states are set in accordance with said unique one of said vectors.
 10. The system of claim 9, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is an omega network.
 11. The system of claim 9, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is a baseline network.
 12. The system of claim 9, wherein said self-routing multistage interconnection network is an indirect binary n-cube network. 